Green cars....

[Cujet]

The sad part is, that diesel generator is better than 40% thermally efficient. It will consume fewer fossil fuel BTU's than the average fuel burning powerplant when used to charge the car. AND, before the "combined cycle" powerplant guys chime in, I said "average" not specific.

 

[eljefino]

https://thedriven.io/2018/12/14/diesel-charge-evs-remote-locations-greener-than-you-think/

It makes sense if there is a gap between grid-based charging stations that would otherwise turn people off from electric cars.

Same as if the city busses ran a reduced schedule-- this could affect connecting mass transit as well, or people who rely on the 11pm bus as a backup to their 10pm bus if they're running late.

 

[Cujet]

It makes more sense to have the 45% thermally efficient engine under the hood.

 

[JamesBond]

Put a generator in the car and ditch the battery and the electric motor.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted by Cujet

The sad part is, that diesel generator is better than 40% thermally efficient. It will consume fewer fossil fuel BTU's than the average fuel burning powerplant when used to charge the car. AND, before the "combined cycle" powerplant guys chime in, I said "average" not specific.


did you see this or find this on the ethernets? Is this real?

 

[wallyuwl]

Did you upload the correct pic? That car is red and black.

 

[jhs914]

And I suspect that diesel generator is powered by off road, non-taxed, fuel. Ironic isn't it?

 

[Andrew1972]

Fills a need.

 

[M56959]

Please keep the discussion technical regarding remote vehicle charging.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by Cujet

The sad part is, that diesel generator is better than 40% thermally efficient. It will consume fewer fossil fuel BTU's than the average fuel burning powerplant when used to charge the car. AND, before the "combined cycle" powerplant guys chime in, I said "average" not specific.


You've purposely included 50 year old assets in the word "average", and excluded modern plants in the Combined scycle comment.

Third generation old thermal is 40% (gross).

We've agreed before that a small engine on board capable of running optimally at the "average" power draw, with batteries and regen are really the optimum solution.

But I'm not opposed the the arrangement that you've shown...but 40% is at the top end. Generator efficiency for that size machine is likely 90%, bringing the nett down to 36%

 

[Cujet]

Shannow, admittedly I'm having a little fun with this one. But it was too good to pass up.

I would love a Tesla dual motor car. Fun and fast. But I'm not of the opinion an electric vehicle powered by a fuel burning plant is a net gain in efficiency. I'm of the opinion that a well designed hybrid consumes less fuel per mile.

 

[Shannow]

 

[Alfred_B]

I would guess it's a backup generator

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by Cujet
Shannow, admittedly I'm having a little fun with this one. But it was too good to pass up.

I would love a Tesla dual motor car. Fun and fast. But I'm not of the opinion an electric vehicle powered by a fuel burning plant is a net gain in efficiency. I'm of the opinion that a well designed hybrid consumes less fuel per mile.


Did you read the announcement that VW and GM are jettisoning hybrid powertrains for EV?

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by Cujet
Shannow, admittedly I'm having a little fun with this one. But it was too good to pass up.

I would love a Tesla dual motor car. Fun and fast. But I'm not of the opinion an electric vehicle powered by a fuel burning plant is a net gain in efficiency. I'm of the opinion that a well designed hybrid consumes less fuel per mile.


Did you read the announcement that VW and GM are jettisoning hybrid powertrains for EV?


I have. Until I see batteries capable of far more range, I'll stand by my opinion that the ICE is still king with regard to practicality. Maybe VW and GM know something I don't????

Highways are chock a block full of long distance drivers. Even the very best EV's can't do it yet. From RV's to long haul trucks, to the average car on a trip.

While 99.99999 % of trips may be shorter than 20 miles, and a Nissan leaf would suffice, we purchase due to both want and need. I use my F150 for local shopping and for taking the off road toys (dirt bike/4 wheeler) and family 800++ miles away for a vacation.



From an EV owner:

"At 200 miles of high speed range in a fully electric car on long road trips of around 500 miles, you have limited room for error and minimal charging flexibility. Depending on your driving style/speed, weather conditions, charger locations, availability of destination charging upon arrival, and other factors, you'll need to stop and charge at least 3 times, and possibly/probably 4. You also may have to stop at specific charging locations just to ensure you reach your destination with comfortable range to spare."

Yet, I can (and do) take a $22,000 Nissan Altima 600+ miles on a single tank, non stop.

 

[PandaBear]

It is a "total" thing.

You can make something 25% efficient all the time, or something 50% efficient 90% of the time and 10% efficient 10% of the time, and the later would still be more efficient. If this is installed along highway to top off between places in a pinch, that's fine. If this is the only way to fuel the EV, that's stupid.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by Cujet
Shannow, admittedly I'm having a little fun with this one. But it was too good to pass up.

I would love a Tesla dual motor car. Fun and fast. But I'm not of the opinion an electric vehicle powered by a fuel burning plant is a net gain in efficiency. I'm of the opinion that a well designed hybrid consumes less fuel per mile.


Did you read the announcement that VW and GM are jettisoning hybrid powertrains for EV?


Like a lot automotive, don't mistake the actions of a car maker, selling to a populist public, in a market dominated by politics for sound engineering.

 

[fdcg27]

When you consider the cost and fuel used in generating power, an EV may not be all that green after all.
I know that there are these sunshine and lollipops visions of solar and wind, but both require huge scale to produce any useful amount of power and neither works when the sun don't shine and the wind don't blow.
It may be that something like my Accord hybrid is about as green as it gets.
I've averaged a little over 51 mpg over these warmer months on lower RVP fuel and the car has averaged a little over 47 mpg from new, including the last winter.
Could it be that the green alternative has been available for some years but many buyers as well as political leaders have been too dim to recognize this?

 

[zzyzzx]

 

[zzyzzx]